You have absolutely no common sense. Yes, I pay for media for my AppleTV, just as people pay for media for DVD players, and jsut like people paid for media for their VHS players. I also pay to go to the movies and then buy a large popcorn and soda because I can.

solipsism...

Don't waste time arguing with a troll. Some people's posts can always be summed up as "I hate Steve Jobs", and the goal is baiting, not discourse.

Doesn't seem to me that 'HD' on a device as small as an iPhone makes much sense.

I've owned 'HD' sets under 30" and they're largely a waste of time.

Given the <40" from > 10' guideline, I don't see the value.

The ONLY reason I can imagine that people might want to have HD material on their iPod is if they're using it as a player to view the material via component on a HDTV that doesn't have an aTV. For instance at the cottage or a friends place. I took my iPod with several movies on a vacation recently to play on the hotel TV. But if the component out on all iPods/iPhone don't allow for HD out, then there's no point at all.

I am sure the studios would be happy to take away discs as it saves them money because the consumer pays for the delivery and the storage. More money to them. But as long as consumers buy discs, the studios will continue to sell them. Besides, why can't downloads and disc coexist? Downloads for those with the complex hard disk systems, disc for the more simple viewers.

The problem is that consumers are buying less and less disks all the time. CD sales were down an astounding 23% this holiday season.

DVD's are down too.

The trend is clear. The consumer is speaking, and they are saying that they are liking disks less and less.

One reason is piracy. Even those who pirate like to deny it, it's true. But the other reasons are that there are other areas of entertainment available.

Cable, satellite, the internet, etc, are all soaking up people's time and money.

Downloadable music is moving up the sales charts while the CD is moving down.

The same thing is beginning to happen to movies.

It isn't the studios who are pushing this on us, they've been resisting it, but it's happening nevertheless.

The fact that Apple is doing this, and that we're talking about it is proof enough of the consumer interest.

Once people talk about the price, and other details of time and quality, you know that it's here to stay.

People are NOT saying, no, no I'll never do this. They are wondering how much it is and whether they will like what they get.

Well, I'm willing to bet that Apple was kinda in a tough spot. First, I think Apple recognized that it absolutely had to get all (or most) of the major studios onboard. In order to do that and have a consistent pricing scheme Apple pretty much ended up with what's been going in industry ie VOD. Second, Apple really didn't have an ace in the hole sort of speak, again, this is a market already has some history (VOD), Apple is just delivering the content through it's established iTMS and a large user base in a slightly different way. The 24-hour rental thing is standard, I had not seen the 30 day thing yet. I really thing Apple probably started with you rent it for a longer period of time, like 30 days or a week, but just couldn't pitch it. Apple has already made some waves with Universal (don't know how much the different subgroups influence each other) so I think all Apple could do here was give and give. As far as ripping dvds, I really don't think the AppleTV is the best device to use here. I don't really get way some folks are having a major issue with this, if you rip your DVDs, use your mac, which has way more horse-power and if you want to watch a DVD, well, they make this thing now called a D-V-D player and a Blu-Ray player (sorry, couldn't resist). I also think the movie industry is weary of the word "rip" after seeing the music industry decline. I've been ripping my DVDs in order to view them later on a computer running iTunes and Front Row, but I'm starting to question if it's worth the time and (wow) hard drive space, even a compressed down to acceptable quality a movie is 2GB, and then back it up, it's a lot of space. And you know what, seriously, I just don't re watch movies often enough to justify it. For me at least, the AppleTV movie rental service is ideal.

The ONLY reason I can imagine that people might want to have HD material on their iPod is if they're using it as a player to view the material via component on a HDTV that doesn't have an aTV. For instance at the cottage or a friends place. I took my iPod with several movies on a vacation recently to play on the hotel TV. But if the component out on all iPods/iPhone don't allow for HD out, then there's no point at all.

I'm not sure the processing power available on any iPod, except perhaps, for the iTouch, is powerful enough for HD. And I'm not even so sanguine about the iTouch.

Remember the questions as to whether the early Mini's could play HD, even 720p? The first, single core, model couldn't.

We might see it in another generation or two. Maybe in 2009 with Intel's 32nm incarnation of their new platform.

Well, I'm willing to bet that Apple was kinda in a tough spot. First, I think Apple recognized that it absolutely had to get all (or most) of the major studios onboard. In order to do that and have a consistent pricing scheme Apple pretty much ended up with what's been going in industry ie VOD. Second, Apple really didn't have an ace in the hole sort of speak, again, this is a market already has some history (VOD), Apple is just delivering the content through it's established iTMS and a large user base in a slightly different way. The 24-hour rental thing is standard, I had not seen the 30 day thing yet. I really thing Apple probably started with you rent it for a longer period of time, like 30 days or a week, but just couldn't pitch it. Apple has already made some waves with Universal (don't know how much the different subgroups influence each other) so I think all Apple could do here was give and give. As far as ripping dvds, I really don't think the AppleTV is the best device to use here. I don't really get way some folks are having a major issue with this, if you rip your DVDs, use your mac, which has way more horse-power and if you want to watch a DVD, well, they make this thing now called a D-V-D player and a Blu-Ray player (sorry, couldn't resist). I also think the movie industry is weary of the word "rip" after seeing the music industry decline. I've been ripping my DVDs in order to view them later on a computer running iTunes and Front Row, but I'm starting to question if it's worth the time and (wow) hard drive space, even a compressed down to acceptable quality a movie is 2GB, and then back it up, it's a lot of space. And you know what, seriously, I just don't re watch movies often enough to justify it. For me at least, the AppleTV movie rental service is ideal.

It's a neat concept, and those are good reasons for doing it, but 99.9% of people aren't willing to spend days on end ripping their collection, so doubling the size and cost of the Apple TV to include a disc drive would be a poor choice on Apple's part. Moreover, Apple could kiss their studio support goodbye if they provided a free means of bypassing DVD copyright protection, not to mention a hefty lawsuit. Besides, the Apple TV only has a 40 or 160GB hard drive ? with no means of adding more storage ? so it's not like there's anywhere to put the movies you can't rip anyhow. By the time Apple included a Blu-Ray drive, 1TB of storage, and everything else that's already in the Apple TV, you'd be talking about a niche product that's more expensive than most people in that niche are even willing to spend. They'd say, "why would I spend $xxxx on a set top box when I could buy a home theatre pc that does all that and more for $xxx?".

Or they could've just put in a slot loading DVD for playback only. Then we wouldn't have to keep a DVD player under the TV. And to the dude who asked why people want DVD playback when they are going away soon. I have 100+ DVDs NOW that I would like to play on my home theater. It would be nice to ditch everything under my TV except for my receiver and ATV. But, I have to keep my DVD player.

On a side note, why hasn't someone made an external DVD drive that runs off the usb port? Stackable, in the same footprint, if you want one, spend the money, all those people who are in this fantasy digital world can continue to do without one.

Or they could've just put in a slot loading DVD for playback only. Then we wouldn't have to keep a DVD player under the TV. And to the dude who asked why people want DVD playback when they are going away soon. I have 100+ DVDs NOW that I would like to play on my home theater. It would be nice to ditch everything under my TV except for my receiver and ATV. But, I have to keep my DVD player.

On a side note, why hasn't someone made an external DVD drive that runs off the usb port? Stackable, in the same footprint, if you want one, spend the money, all those people who are in this fantasy digital world can continue to do without one.

As far as I know, there have been such drives, but I believe they need USB 2 for DVD.

There hasn't yet been a big enough market for the ATv for a third party to make such a device specifically for it. But, if it now takes off, there will be.

Doesn't seem to me that 'HD' on a device as small as an iPhone makes much sense.

I think the point is simply compatibility. Obviously you wouldn't rent the HD version to watch on an iPod. But if you rented it and watched it on your HDTV, it would be nice to be able to copy it over to your iPod and watch it again the next morning on the train going to work.

It would also be nice if the iPods could output hdtv signal to an hdtv.

Quote:

Originally Posted by melgross

The problem is that consumers are buying less and less disks all the time. CD sales were down an astounding 23% this holiday season.

DVD's are down too.

You make some good points but you miss a major factor in DVD sales. There are new competing HD formats in the midst of a format war. People don't want to buy DVDs when they know the format's days are numbered. And people don't want to buy hddvd OR bluray until there's a clear winner. In the meantime, people just stop (or slow) buying dvds at all. Once there's a clear winner, I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually see bluray sales ramp up to where DVD sales were.

Video games are the same way - when a new generation of consoles come out, sales tail WAY off...but once the new platforms get a foothold, sales come back stronger than ever.

If the studios think revenue is down now, they haven't seen anything yet if they try that business model.

Quite so. But I really doubt the studio would push for this. If that's what they wanted, they could have done it 30 years ago by not releasing movies on VHS to retail, but instead only to rental stores like blockbuster. But the studios keep selling movies-to-own, and keep putting them on newer and better formats. And it makes them billions of dollars.

You make some good points but you miss a major factor in DVD sales. There are new competing HD formats in the midst of a format war. People don't want to buy DVDs when they know the format's days are numbered. And people don't want to buy hddvd OR bluray until there's a clear winner. In the meantime, people just stop (or slow) buying dvds at all. Once there's a clear winner, I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually see bluray sales ramp up to where DVD sales were.

Video games are the same way - when a new generation of consoles come out, sales tail WAY off...but once the new platforms get a foothold, sales come back stronger than ever.

I'm not sure how much that's affecting it. It likely has some effect.

But, even those formats are doomed in the long run.

As far as consoles go, the PS2 was still the leading console until sometime last year, and it still sells very well.

That's because it's cheaper and plays far more games.

BD and HD DVD movies cost about $30, too much for many, if not most, people. that price will have to come down.

If the studios think revenue is down now, they haven't seen anything yet if they try that business model.

Don't think that. It's easy to say, but people want their content.

It's very interesting to note that pay forplay is a very old idea.

Edward Bellemy wrote a very popular book back in 1889, I think it was (I don't have my copy in front of me).

In it, he did a Rip Van Winkle. He fell asleep in 1889, and woke in 1999. I won't bothe with the premise, but some things in the book are very interesting.

The one that interests us it the method of delivery of music.

Back then, the telephone was just getting started, and Edison hadn't yet made news with his cylinders.

Bellemy thought that in the future music would be delivered to every home via the telephone line. How? well with no recordings, he thought that there would be many orchestras and bands playing 24 hours a day. you would pick the music you wanted, and voilá, the music would come through the phone line (at better quality than calls). You would pay for what you listened to.

See, nothing new!

I can see a time when no one will "own" any content, but will pay a small amount when needed.

I do think that the payments will be far smaller for many things then we see today. But, that's in the future.